The Tao of Anarchy: There is no God. There is no State. They are all superstitions that are established by the power-hunger psychopaths to divide, rule, and enslave us. It's only you and me, we are all true and real existence though in one short life. That is, We all are capable to freely interact with one another without coercion from anyone. We all are capable to take self-responsibility to find ways to live with one another in liberty, equality, harmony, and happiness before leaving this world forever. We all were born free and equal among all beings on this planet. We are not imprisoned in and by a place with a political name just because we were born there by chance. We are not chained to a set of indoctrinated beliefs that have been imposed upon us by so-called traditions. This Planet is home to all of us. No one owns it. We share the benefits from and responsibility to this Earth. We pledge no oath, no allegiance to no one; submit to no authority. We are all free and equal. The only obligation we all must undertake constantly with consistency is to respect the same freedoms and rights of others.

Amnesty Strips Aung San Suu Kyi of its Highest Honor; Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize Should be Next

PQC: IMHO this Nobel shit has been politicized or rather it was politicized in the first place, thus it should be done away with. Just don’t pay any attention to it.

Amnesty
International announced it would strip Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi
of its top award, saying it was “profoundly dismayed” at her failure to
acknowledge the full scale of atrocities against the Rohingya people.

Before you are tempted to view this as some kind of principled,
honorable move on Amnesty’s part, stop yourself and check out its dubious government and corporate funding sources, its selective support for
the concept of free speech and the fact that it spends quite a bit of
time soft-pedaling Western imperialism and its atrocities while
magnifying the wrongdoings of the West’s adversaries.

Amnesty’s
attempt to win plaudits for its decision to revoke Suu Kyi’s award has
come after mounting calls for the controversial figure’s 1991 Nobel
Peace Prize to be stripped from her. Nearly half a million people have
signed a Change.org petition calling for the Nobel Committee to take back the award.

Given that the committee has been, shall we say, less than picky, about
who it bestows the honor on, we can probably assume Suu Kyi will remain
on the recipients list. Not to mention, the committee has already
confirmed that worrying about what recipients do after the award
ceremony isn’t part of the job.
You see, the rules regulating the Nobel Prize, apparently, do not allow
for the award to be withdrawn, which is fairly convenient.

I
say convenient, because if they started taking Nobel Prizes back from
all the people who (oops!) didn’t actually deserve them, the list of
remaining recipients would shrink very quickly indeed.

The
first unworthy awardee that springs to mind is, of course, former US
President Barack Obama, who, rather inexplicably, was presented with his
Nobel Peace Prize a mere nine months into his first term as president
on the basis that it seemed like he might do something worthy of the
honor at some point in the future. Sadly for the Nobel Committee, which
clearly had high hopes for the man, Obama went on to bomb seven different countries over the course of his two terms.

How interesting, by the way, that the committee rules won’t provide for
an undeserved award to be taken back, but they have no problem giving
an award to someone for things they haven’t even done yet.

Asked in 2016 by comedian Stephen Colbert why he received the prize,
Obama said “To be honest, I still don’t know” — so at least even he
seems to know the whole thing is a bit of a joke.

The farcical nature of the so-called prestigious prize was compounded again in 2012 when it was award to… the European Union.

But well before any of that, in 1973, we had infamous war criminal
Henry Kissinger who somehow managed to win the Nobel Peace Prize for his
efforts to negotiate a ceasefire during the Vietnam War, while at the
same time he was secretly orchestrating the devastating carpet-bombing
of Cambodia. Kissinger’s peace prize was a decision which satirist and
songwriter Tom Lehrer said “made political satire obsolete.”

If
the Nobel Committee was, however, in the business of taking back
awards, it’s easy to imagine that Suu Kyi’s might be one of the first to
go. Come on, it would be fine to take back an utterly insignificant and
meaningless award from Myanmar’s out-of-fashion leader, but
highlighting Western hypocrisies or crimes by swiping an award from
Obama? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves!

Now, not to be too
much of a stickler here, but since we’re engaging in wishful thinking,
I’d also like to suggest that the committee take back Malala Yousafzai’s
award. There is no doubt that Malala’s activism on behalf of girls’
education, before and after her near-fatal 2012 shooting by the Taliban,
is admirable.

But, awarded at 16 years old, Malala had become a
poster child, a pawn and propaganda tool of the West. While she was
being showered with praise and concern in the West — which was
portraying itself as a savior to the poor unfortunate Pakistanis — the
Obama administration was ramping up its drone bombing of that country,
killing plenty of children who weren’t so lucky as Malala. Death by
American drone is obviously a far superior and more justifiable way to
go than meeting a Taliban bullet.

Anyway, maybe the Suu Kyi
case could serve as a reminder going forward that very often,
international awards bestowed on flavor-of-the-month political leaders
and activists are actually an utter farce — and that perhaps we should
do away with them or at least stop paying so much attention to the whole
charade.